User talk:John Carter

June 2007 Wikiproject Christianity Newsletter

The Christianity WikiProject Newsletter Volume I, no. 1 - June 2007
Project News Four articles are at FA level and sixteen are GA level articles. You can help by adopting a topic. There is a lot of work for this Wikiproject. Go to tasks to find out how to help. Please help with the Destubbification Drive. John Carter created the template {{Christian list}}. There are currently five article being peer reviewed by the peer review team. Please stop by and see if there is any way that you could contribute to those articles. It has been proposed by John Carter that the various other projects which relate to Christianity ought to all at least tag those articles which fall within their scope. That way, this project would have a better idea which articles do not fall within the specific scope of any of the other related projects. Articles can be "tagged" by placing {{ChristianityWikiProject}} in the articles talk page.	Current proposals and discussions We're sorry if you did not want to receive this newsletter, but this is sent to all Wikiproject Christianity Members as it is the first newsletter. If you would like to recieve this in the future, or if you wouldn't, you must add your user name accordingly here. If you've just joined, add your name to the Members section of Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy! Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 2 – July 2007). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing! Contributors to this Issue Nswinton\talk Wikihermit • Talk HermesBot
Christianity Articles by Quality Make visible or invisible by clicking Show or Hide, respectively. Christianity articles by quality and importance Quality Importance Top High Mid Low NA Other ??? Total FA 10 8 35 119 2 1 175 FL 1 14 20 35 FM 199 1 200 A 1 1 2 GA 21 16 194 432 29 692 B 206 234 790 2,116 315 155 3,816 C 350 799 2,284 6,470 2,343 461 12,707 Start 226 224 1,300 18,410 2 10,270 775 31,207 Stub 12 278 14,684 8,302 361 23,637 List 12 38 698 982 2 77 21 1,830 Category 2 4 9 21,147 1,328 22,490 Disambig 12 301 17 330 File 863 30 893 Portal 1 373 1 375 Project 175 14 189 Redirect 6 34 86 687 1,518 529 2 2,862 Template 2 6 11 2,014 110 2,143 NA 2 2 Other 2 127 129 Assessed 833 1,370 5,689 43,955 26,721 23,370 1,776 103,714 Unassessed 8 104 226 338 Total 833 1,370 5,689 43,963 26,721 23,474 2,002 104,052 WikiWork factors (?) ω = 361,673 Ω = 5.00
We couldn't do it without you!
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

June 2007 Automatically delivered by HermesBot

Eliza Marsden Hassall

On 13 July, 2007, Did you know?' was updated with a fact from the article Eliza Marsden Hassall, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Hi

Wiki-Alert

A James Bond wiki you should try is Bondpedia Please come along and contribute by editing or joining for more information contact User:Highfields who is an admin on the site and self proclaimed 'Head of Bondpedia Advertising on Wikipedia'

References are not my strong point

I tried to put in the references for Anthony Kiedis, David Beckham, etc. Yikes! But I did find them when I searched it. Just search "(subst. name)" "Kabbalah". Like I said I tried to do it myself but it didn't go well. But I do see how that link is only Demi Moore and Donna Karan if that's what your talking about. Lighthead ^þ 22:41, August 15 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ebionites

I'm thinking it might be best to present the information regarding Michael's at least occasionally dubious activity in chronological order, as that would be probably the way in which the arbitrators would understand it most easily. That would in effect be requesting you to present the first statement of those who question Michael's conduct. Would you be willing to do this? In any event, I believe that, at this point, the end may be finally in sight regarding this matter. John Carter 16:06, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, my time is too limited to participate in this action so you will have to proceed without me. --Loremaster 12:44, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I will proceed forward without Loremaster to make the opening remarks for evidence. However, my immediate priority is work with Str1977 to address the objections of FAR. Ovadyah 14:39, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

John, I am finished presenting my evidence to ArbCom. I focused my efforts on misleading and fraudulent content. Unfortunately, I used up my 100 diffs, and there are still some things that need to be covered or could use more coverage.

1. Eisenman & Tabor conflations resulting in misleading or fraudulent content
2. Refusal to cite sources and provide specific evidence to support claims
3. Personal attacks
4. Persistent disruptive editing against the consensus of four editors
5. Disregard for Wiki policies
6. How all of the above was the main reason for demotion of the article

I hope you still intend to contribute. Michael Price shows a history of passive-aggressive behavior, and if nothing more is done, he will return to the article worse than ever to make life hell for the new editors. Ovadyah 03:26, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I responded to your question on my talk page. Thanks for contributing. Ovadyah 17:54, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I have proposed a remedy on the Workshop page that Michael Price should be permanently banned from editing on the Ebionites article, and I detailed my reasons for your review and comments. Ovadyah 17:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Undeletion of other micronation articles

Hi John. Earlier this year 2 important micronation articles were deleted by a rampant admin despite the fact that there was an even split between delete/keep votes on the AFDs for each of them, and hence no justification for deletion.

I'm referring to Flags of micronations and Coats of arms of micronations. The content for these articles was drawn from the existing list of notable micronation articles within WP.

Do you think we should simply recreate the articles, or is going through the formal undeletion process preferable? --Gene_poole 04:49, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply John. In my opinion the 2 articles should be recreated in their previous form, rather than incorporating them into List of micronations, because the stand-alone pages follow the format and precedent of all other existing flag and coat-of-arms related articles in WP, for which a template exists. Given the historic acrimony associated with their deletion, it would be better if someone other than me recreated them. Do you want to do the deed? I'll happily clean them up afterwards. As far as JRG goes, he agreed to take the content into his personal space to save the it from being lost completely during the deletion campaign - so I'm amost certain he'll support the recreation. --Gene_poole 06:35, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Coaches and executives

Regarding this edit, where it looks like you removed the "coaches" category as being redundant with the "executives" category, it seems that, at least in the context of major sports, head coaches are not considered "executives", whereas the subject of the article is in fact both a head coach and an executive. heqs ·:. 20:08, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jainism and non-creationism

The article Jainism and non-creationism you nominated as a good article has failed , see Talk:Jainism and non-creationism for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of said article. If you oppose this decision, you may ask for a reassessment. Cheers, CP 20:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Your WikiProject Biography ideas

I certainly agree that we need more workgroups, possibly some of the ones you listed. What's more important, however, is having workgroups that actually work as a group and get things done. I also think the core biography project has been a failure. It's very difficult to work on articles like those, especially when basically nobody is working on them. I've been focusing on Wikisource lately so I haven't spent much time on Wikipedia lately, but I will bring this up on the main talk page when I can. Psychless 02:06, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help

Thanks for removing the fiction tag on the resurrection article... I don't feel that the tag was necessarily 'profoundly inappropriate' but I think it was the wrong tag for whatever the editor intended (assuming good faith)... but thanks for removing it. I hesitate to remove those things without a second opinion. Nice to meet you, and thanks for your contributions to the best collaboration in history. User:Pedant 07:30, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for commenting on the WikiProject.

And I've added those details to its description. Hopefully now it stands out from the crowd.--Gp75motorsports 11:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

DYK Award for 50 articles - Belated, but here

(DYK) section, which presents short blurbs and links to new articles.

		The 50 DYK Medal
		I, Victuallers, hereby award you with The 50 DYK Medal, for your over 50 contributions to the Wikipedia:Did you know? section as featured on the Main Page. Your work is appreciated. Thank you. Yours, Victuallers 11:15, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Head's up regarding your signature

I have noticed that you sign your posts as "John Carter" which is rather different than your actual username of "Warlordjohncarter". WP:SIG states:

In no circumstance should a signature be used to impersonate another user: in particular, a signature should not be identical to the actual username of another existing user, and even more importantly should not link to someone else's userpage. While not an absolute requirement, it is common practice for a signature to resemble to some degree the username it represents.

Therefore, I would suggest you create the user John Carter and redirect that user to your userpage #REDIRECT [[User:Warlordjohncarter]]. That will prevent someone from "stealing" your identity, or prevent you from being accused of such. Otherwise, you might want to reconsider your signature. Regards.--Old Hoss 21:15, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm actually surprised that the name was available. When I first created the account, I seem to remember thinking that that name was already taken. Sorry for the mistake, and thanks for your alerting me to the situation. :) John Carter 21:21, 19 October 2007 (UTC) (cut & pasted from my talk page for continuity)

Now that you mention it, you might want to sign in/create that account to make sure the username is not taken - just because you could create the redirect does not necessarily mean someone has that account (that was my fault for not mentioning that, I did not foresee that possibility). After I read some more, you might want to scrap the redirect and instead label it as a {{Doppelganger}} account; be sure to make the edit not as "Warlordjohncarter", but as "John Carter". Sorry for the mix-up on that. Regards.--Old Hoss 21:47, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for helping on the Biblical vs. biblical problem

I am pleasantly surprised to see how good a job you did of writing a fair and thorough synopsis for the MOS:CAPS talk page (I was watching that page to see if it would come up there!) Thanks for taking care to present a neutral, balanced summary of the matter. Til Eulenspiegel 22:45, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

The final WikiProject James Bond collaboration of the fortnight

WikiProject James Bond:Collaboration of the fortnight (two weeks)

The new collaboration for this fortnight is (October 20, 2007 - November 3, 2007) is Diamonds Are Forever (film) Please contribute by editing this article, in an attempt to get it to good article status For more information see the page here or contact SpecialWindler. CHECK OUT THE TALK PAGE, FOR THINGS YOU CAN DO ON Diamonds Are Forever (film) The Living Daylights is currently a GA nominee.

THE COLLABORATION WILL CEASE ON NOVEMBER 6 2007 due to failing standards and low participants. If you still wish this collaboration to run, then work hard in making this collaboration of GA status.

Thankyou,  SpecialWindler talk (currently in control)  03:17, 20 October 2007 (UTC).

Shell Creek

You do a lot of nice work in Wikipedia. I'm curious why Shell Creek would be a WikiProject Montana article? No offense intended-I'm new to this community. Thanks--DutchTower 13:30, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Image-David Koresh mugshot.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Image-David Koresh mugshot.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:31, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject History!

Welcome to WikiProject History! We are a group dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to history. Now that you're a member you might want to drop by one of our Working Groups. It is also recommended that you watchlist our talk page as well. Working Groups at WikiProject History: Assessment · Collaboration · Review · Outreach · Task forces

With much gratitude

I would like to thank you for the award you bestowed. It is my hope that my work will continue to live up to the esteem you've offered. (I'm still scratching my head at the implications of Alexander Haig, though... ;) ) Most appreciatively, Girolamo Savonarola 19:20, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Jenna Jameson from Montana?

In what way does Jenna Jameson qualify as being from Montana? [1] She was born in Vegas, and now lives in Arizona. --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 22:46, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject CFL

I noticed that you have been adding non-CFL articles to the project, such as Canadian Bowl, Quebec Bantam Football League, etc. While these are Canadian football-related articles, they are outside the scope of the Canadian Football League, and should be outside the scope of the project as well. The sport and the league are two different things, and the subjects of the articles in question may not have any particular affiliation with the league. Until we have a parent project for Canadian football, I don't think we should add these kinds of articles, and if no one objects, I will be removing the tags. heqs ·:. 04:45, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

It only makes sense to rename the project to WikiProject Canadian football, then, as that is the category / umbrella topic for all these articles. Portal:Canadian football is already correct in this respect. heqs ·:. 13:27, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Preity Zinta A-class

Hey old buddy howz it going? Can you beleive they killed my old kitty in the commons and forced me to get a new one. I now have an exceptionally evil one with one blue eye and one brown!! Could you check out Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/A-class review and have alook at Preity Zinta. I would be deeply grateful if you could review it. All the best ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 13:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

WikProject History

I'd appreciate some input from you at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject History#Task force images and Wikipedia:WikiProject History/Review#Airship. Thanks!--Phoenix 15 (Talk) 17:03, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Superman merger

Yeah, I saw, I think we're kind of crossing over each other a little. I've moved the discussion back since the merge templates both link to it on the project page, and I also think it will gain broader input there, the workgroups aren't really on the radar yet, I'm still trying to get everything set up right. Sorry about all the confusion, Steve block Talk 16:28, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Banner

I'll probably set the categories up as I get the banner up to speed, so I can test it all and make sure the bot will run through and that it all links up, but I'll keep you in mind if I get stuck. :) Steve block Talk 22:11, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

History banner

The banner is done and I'll get Kirill to add the syntax to the documentation. You can start whenever--Phoenix 15 (Talk) 19:54, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Agriculture Project Talk Page Banner

John, thanks for your technical clean up of our categories and addition of the assessment department. Do you know why our Banner is linking NA articles to Category:NA-Class articles rather than Category:Non-article Agriculture pages? I thought I had the code correct, but I must be missing something. Also, I've placed the latter category in the former, but it is alphabetizing under "N", which doesn't make sense, do you know how to fix that? Finally, how do we make the other assessment categories (stub, B, etc.) go to the right place, wherever that may be? Thanks again.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 23:16, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Ha! you're right, I was looking at the banner itself. But only "NA" seems to link to anything, the other assessments are redlinked. In other words, if I assess an article as B-Class and then mouse-over the "B" it should link to B-Class Articles, but it is redlinked. Do you know the problem?--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 00:50, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Double-checking, the above example seems to attempt to link to B-Class agriculture articles, other project's banners seem to link to Category:B-Class articles rather than "Category:B-Class Topic articles". Do you know which is correct and in either case how to fix ours?--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 00:57, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Ignore my first questions, they were a mistake of failing to look at the bottom of the page at the cats. But these last two paragraphs, plus this one, I'm specifically referring to the banners themselves. Where the rating shows on the banner should be a link to something. All the other banners seem to link to "Category X-class articles", whereas our banner is redlinked and seems to be trying to link to "X-Class agriculture articles" (in article space). Obviously that makes no sense, but it shouldn't be redlinked in anycase, it should either be linking to "Category X-class articles" like all the other project banners appear to, or at least be fixed to link to "Category:X-class agriculture articles". For some reason NA is correct (or at least it is consistent with other banners. All of the cats at the bottom of the page seem to be fine (now that I'm looking in the right place), but that's an unrelated issue. Take a look at Talk:Oat. Notice that the "Start" on each of the other two project banners is blue and links to Category:Start-Class articles, but our "B" is red.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 01:44, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Nominating AfD

Hi, if you want to nominate an article for deletion, please follow the process listed here: WP:AFD#How_to_list_pages_for_deletion.

Thank you. Carlosguitar 16:54, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:CFL categories

Now that the project has been renamed (and thanks btw, I updated some redirects to it as well as attempted to get the Portal:Canadian football going), we should move the Category:WikiProject Canadian Football League → Category:WikiProject Canadian football as well. As these are template-populated, and you started the templates I thought you might want to take care of the changes - I'm not totally familiar with how all the WikiProject categories work. Let me know if there's anything I can do, heqs ·:. 19:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

A-class review: Preity Zinta

Hello! I've been waiting for your reply. Most of your instructions for the page have been have been completed, except for one controversies intro. What do you think on it now? (Sorry for coming to you directly) Shahid • ^Talk2me 22:05, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

You may have not noticed my message because of the following message, but I see you're busy so OK thanks anyway, Shahid • ^Talk2me 22:32, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Rhodesiancoatofarms.GIF

Image:Rhodesiancoatofarms.GIF is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 22:07, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:Pocket pets

Category:Pocket pets has been nominated for deletion; you are invited to participate in the discussion located here. – Black Falcon ^(Talk) 01:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

WPRhodesia

File:Rhodesiancoatofarms.GIF Hi, John Carter, and welcome to WikiProject Rhodesia! We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying, categorizing, and improving articles relevant to Rhodesia. Here are some points that may be helpful: Our main aim is to help improve Rhodesia-related articles, so if people ask for help with an article, please try your hardest to help them if you are able. Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it. The project has several ongoing and developing activities, such as the current collaboration, which you are welcome to participate. If you have another language besides English, please consider adding yourself to our translation section, to help us improve our foreign Rhodesia topics. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We hope you enjoy working on this project.

Mangwanani 11:23, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Have at it! You really have to wonder what subject I edited across to attract that sort of thing. I must be doing something right. -- SECisek 20:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

DYK October 29

On 29 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sebaldus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Andrew c ^[talk] 22:46, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Nevada

I see you are a member of WP:NEVADA, do you live there? I am looking for a photographer, skill is not a necessity, I just need pictures of a house, any help or even a direction you could point me in would be great. Thanks.IvoShandor 10:47, 30 October 2007 (UTC) (bump)

I'm sorry, I checked there earlier and didn't see the reply then. :) I found some stuff on Flickr and I think I have traced the actual photographer's account (they were consistently reproduced even on Flickr despite the copyright status, so I will inquire there about those pictures. Thanks for your response, I also have some other options, I know some people in the area, whether I can convince them to go do this, well I will have to see. IvoShandor 23:05, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Portal:Scientology

Thank you so much for creating this wonderful portal. A couple things. First, why does it still have lots of redlinks? And second, I really think that for an article from the project to be featured in the portal, it must be quality material. Thus, I think that only articles that have been passed as either WP:GA or WP:FA on Wikipedia should be featured at Portal:Scientology. Your thoughts? Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 14:23, 30 October 2007 (UTC).

• Maybe that's too harsh criteria. I would revise it to include only current WP:GA and WP:FA, as well as WP:FFA, because those at one point had consensus as an FA, so that is saying something. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 14:27, 30 October 2007 (UTC).
  • Well, we certainly won't get the FP with the current B quality articles featured, in my estimation, so it's a catch 22. Why not simply start with the smaller amount of a pool to choose from, it is quite possible that in the coming months, we will have a large pool. Perhaps not of too many more FAs, but I have a feeling hopefully some more GAs. Other than this discussion, how else can I help you and what are the other criterion for FP ? Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 14:39, 30 October 2007 (UTC).
  • Also, do you like the image I am currently using as the default portal icon from now on? Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 14:40, 30 October 2007 (UTC).
    • Portal:Psychology is by far the best and most comprehensive and active Featured Portal I have ever seen. We should model the portal after that. So, no "Suggestions" redlinks, but instead the links they use, and the criteria they use for inclusion as well. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 15:39, 30 October 2007 (UTC).

Hi Curt & John, I saw the note on the Religion Portal talk page about adding a Scientology Portal link. I'll do that in the next few days if no one else does. Other points... You don't need featured or good articles to get a featured portal. Important and complete is a better way to think about what you might include. The best place to start for feedback is Wikipedia:Portal peer review. That gives you a good idea of where things stand. You can look on my user page for examples of featured portals I designed. Take a look at Wikipedia:Featured portals for the complete list. You also can get some clues about what to do at Wikipedia talk:Featured portal criteria Regards, RichardF 17:12, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

• RichardF (talk · contribs), thank you for taking the initiative to come here and offer us advice, that was very kind! We'll take a look at the suggestions you mentioned, and as the portal develops, try to implement them and go for a Wikipedia:Portal peer review. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 19:40, 30 October 2007 (UTC).

• John, I made some adjustments to the portal subpages, modeling after Wikipedia:Featured portals, Portal:Psychology. Let me know what you think. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 00:50, 31 October 2007 (UTC).
  • I have a few more creative changes in mind before a Peer Review, bear with me a moment or two... Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 01:05, 31 October 2007 (UTC).

Thinking about a review in a bit

• We need to have 10 featured pieces (not WP:FA), just featured in our portal, in each of the sections that recycle random material, before we can go for a review and stand a good chance. I expanded 10 for the bios, trying to keep and even keel between successful scientologists and controversy, and men and women. I also added a few to the pictures segment, same deal, trying to give a nice light and some controversial history highlights touched upon. Now to see if we actually have 10 nice articles to highlight. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 04:38, 31 October 2007 (UTC).
  • So now I completed the 10 images with a nice pic of Hubbard's navy vessel. We currently only have 5 articles in the portal. Do you think we should add in the other two GAs that are currently not there? I am working on getting some other related articles up to GA status, but FA status might take a deal more time. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 05:20, 31 October 2007 (UTC).

Re: WP:HIST

{{WPMILHIST}} generates those assessment categories because that's what Phoenix-wiki asked for. I don't particularly care one way or the other (although I think the current approach will reduce the desire to double-tag articles); you guys just need to decide if you want them or not, and I'll change the template to suit. Kirill 18:31, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I asked because of the double tagging thing, but another way around it would be to create stat box as a subpage of WP:HIST with it on. I'll rmv it if you want but I think it's a pretty good idea, seeing as it's for version 1.0.--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 18:47, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

If you want, ask him to remove it. I don't mind to be honest. Forget what I just said--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 18:49, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay, we'll remove it then, like I just said. Could you see to it cos I'm kinda busy right now--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 19:03, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

'Tis done. ;-) Kirill 03:55, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

We have a troll

Notice that my comments have been blanked from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Agriculture and about five other talk pages. Call your favorite admins, we need them. Montanabw^(talk) 19:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

You are already in debate on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Agriculture, if you note edit history of both discussion page and project page, that's two. Phony warning to me here, blanked my comments here, oh heck, read his talk page, you will note there is a pattern here, oh heck, now I have admins on MY butt. HELLLLP!!! Montanabw^(talk) 19:21, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry you got drug into this. I was only trying to cool things down over on the Agriculture page but it backfired completely. Sigh. Montanabw^(talk) 20:14, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

"However, you do not have the option of removing formal warnings from your user page"

Yes he does! Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:36, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Yep, I trust you've gotten the idea that warning or reverting editors over these sorts of removals only inflames the situation.--Isotope23 ^talk 19:44, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Happy Halloween!

File:Halloween Hush Puppies.jpg

Photograph of my Halloween-themed Hush Puppies plush basset hounds in my bedroom.

As Halloween is my favorite holiday, I just wanted to wish my twenty favorite fellow Wikipedians a Happy Halloween! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 04:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

AE - splitting the article

If you'll refer to the AE talk page, you'll see there is one split scenario I could accept, as I see that it would have the best chance of being balanced from the start. It's just Dab's splitting scenario which I can't accept as such. However, I would personnally prefer the article be kept as one for now (it's not huge), but I can compromise some, as long as a separation is done with the proper care, and to me, that would mean a 3-way split.--Ramdrake 15:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Technology

So you spotted me reeviving that too? Yes, assessing importance seems a good idea. Maybe we should do it with history too--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 21:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

More Zinta

Any idea who is gonna make the decision to promote Zinta to A class? We now have 7 clear supports ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 22:00, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Zinta for FA

Hi John. Due to the strong support for the article I do think with perhaps only very minor adjustments it is up to FA standard. Therefore I am proposing it for an FA now. I am using the A-class nomination which received a significant turn out as a form of peer review which has persuaded me to nominate it so soon. I hope this is OK - I have also contacted the league of copyeditors who can hopefully do anything that needs adjusting. Your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Preity Zinta would be warmly appreciated thanks. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 10:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

P.S if you are going for adminship (which I certainly wouldn't want to do!!) I would also offer my strong support for you. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 10:52, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Adminship

I normally discuss these things via email but you don't seem to have one set. I was wondering if you wanted nominating for adminship. I'd be willing to nominate you--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 23:06, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd be happy to second it. (Emperor 23:59, 31 October 2007 (UTC))

I would gladly third it. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 00:04, 1 November 2007 (UTC).

I replied on my talk. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 00:48, 1 November 2007 (UTC).

No worries - just keep it in mind. I think if you looked into it what they require isn't so exacting but in the end it is your call. (Emperor 00:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC))

Help with technology categories

Could you do the technlogy categories the same way you did the history ones? thabks--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 17:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I'd like you to organise the categories like Category:Stub-Class history articles for an example. Put the links at the top etc. I'm doing some other stuff with WP:TECHNOLOGY now so I'd be grateful if you'd do it, thanks--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 17:43, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your kind words John. I have been working on the Scientology articles for over a year now and find that I am probably too emotionally involved now. I don't expect to spend much time, if any, on the project anymore. I also find that I can do more good elsewhere. For instance I recently made some major improvements to Yoko Ono and no one got upset. Wishing you well as always. Steve Dufour 22:11, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I can understand, believe me. If you ever think be of any help to you, let me know. John Carter 22:19, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again. Steve Dufour 01:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Architecture of Africa

Thank you John Cater and I truly appreciate the heads up. I seem to clash with the belligerent types it seems because I don't put up with nonsense. I truly hate to assume bad faith on you, but some of your charges against me I felt were unwarranted and out of context, so I really wanted to distance myself from it. I mean no harm to no one and I'm sure you don't either. Thanx again.Taharqa 23:45, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for getting back so late; I've been away. But in response to your last message, and after some reflection, indeed, I concede to a lot of my mistakes. I still contend that my intention is not to "insult" per se, but a lot of my language usage (when in a heated dispute) can come off a bit condescending and every once in a while, I may intentionally hurl an insult out of frustration as I'm admittedly... not emotional, but reactional/confrontational. A few users used to help me out with suppressing that urge, but I've deviated a bit when put under pressure. I will watch it and consciously make it an effort to destroy that nasty habit since it is nowhere near productive and indeed, only adds to the contention. I see that when practicing such behavior, nothing gets done so thanx for the reminder and I'm still working on my conduct and etiquette, one day at a time (maybe in an approachable way, I just need to be reminded more often)..Taharqa 02:56, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Robert Lentz

In partial answer to your wondering about Lentz's contributions to the books, I found the following on a promotional page:

Christ in the Margins
by Edwina Gateley and icons by Br. Robert Lentz, ofm
"Christ in the Margins features forty Br. Robert Lentz icons and biographies of Christ-figures who confound the status quo. Together with Edwina Gateley’s lyrical portraits of contemporary men and women who have revealed the Christ-presence to her in the most unlikely places, it is both profoundly spiritual and spiritually profound."

and
A Passion for Life Fragments of the Face of God
by Joan D. Chittister, OSB and icons by Br. Robert Lentz, ofm
"Benedictine Sister Joan Chittister reflects on the lives and gifts of saints and heroes throughout history, women and men who each reflect a facet of the face of God. This book includes icons by Br. Robert Lentz of Pope John XXIII, Hildegard of Bingen, Martin Luther King, Jr., Saints Francis and Clare, Dorothy Day, Teresa of Avila, Archbishop Oscar Romero, Edith Stein, and many others."

Obviously, these quotes are not appropriate to the article, but I thought they might help answer what you were wondering.  :) 00:32, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Cell Signaling Template Offer

Wikipedia:WikiProject Cell Signaling: Is your offer still on the table? Biochemza 15:55, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

No content in Category:A-Class Academy Awards articles

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:A-Class Academy Awards articles, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:A-Class Academy Awards articles has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:A-Class Academy Awards articles, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 19:30, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Did You Know?

On November 2, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Olegarius, which you nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Sam Blacketer 20:52, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Notice to all members of WikiProject Maryland

There are a few things going on right now in WikiProject Maryland that I thought all members should know about, especially the first one.

• Not too long ago, Marylandstater raised the question of exactly how many members of the project are still active. For this reason, I'm asking everyone who is still active, and wants to remain in the project, to put an asterisk (*) after their username on the project's participants list. You have until the end of November 17, 2007 to do so, sometime after that, all the names that do not have an asterisk will be removed. This is just to clean up the ever expanding list. If you've been gone and come back to find that you've been removed from the list, don't take it personally, just re-add yourself! I won't feel bad at all if no one gets removed, in fact, it would be nice if all 30 members still consider themselves active. Also, this won't affect the two subprojects, but speaking of the subprojects...
• As of sometime next week WikiProject Baltimore City College will be no more. Myself, Golem88991, and John Carter have decided to make it into a task force of WikiProject Maryland. If you have any objections, concerns, or comments, please post them in the talk page topic concerning this.

Now for the exiting news:

• I'm pleased to announce the creation of the Baltimore Task Force! Those interested in contributing to Wikipedia's numerous articles related to Maryland's largest city, now have a place to collaborate.
• I'd also like to take this time to propose a project newsletter. Any comments should be directed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Maryland#Newsletter.

A couple last things:

• The portal is in desperate need of maintenance, anyone who's interested, go check it out.
• It's probably a good idea to add the project page (and thus the project talk page) to your watchlist. That way, you can easily see when new comments are posted.

I hope you read through all that ;). Thanks to all members for your contributions to the project's articles so far, let's keep up the good work!
Sincerely, -Jeff ^(talk) 05:56, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XX (October 2007)

The October 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 15:11, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Belarus

Wikipedia:WikiProject Belarus has been created, you had expressed an interest! Chris 17:46, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: WikiProject Music with Place Names

Hello, Thank you for your feedback, however I cannot move it to user namespace as I haven't got admin PhilB 20:15, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah how very naive of me {groan}. Sorry I have never used it before! BTW is it possible to move a template (this one inparticular) to the user namespace? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Philipbembridge (talk • contribs) 20:22, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

{grr sign bot damn you I keep forgetting!} Thankyou! PhilB 20:35, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On November 5, 2007, a fact from the article Praejectus, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:26, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Hey, thanks

I'm not sure if I should put this under the DYK box to keep things in chronological order or below it to keep the box in its prominent spot at the very bottom of the page.

Anyway, thanks for your remark on my talk page. As I've mentioned to the others who have brought this up, I'm really uncertain as to whether I'd want to be an administrator. I have to think about it for a while. I also want to take this month and probably next month to work on what I see as my own weaker points before I even contemplate it, which is a good exercise regardless of any possible RfA nomination. In the meantime, though, it's very gratifying to know that some people feel that way.

Best,

Doczilla 17:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

RFA

Hi John,

I noticed your post on the Administrator's Noticeboard about needing administrators. I would like to become an administrator, and if I were elected, I would help with new page patrols. I'm not sure if I have a good chance of election, though. Also, I imagine it would be bad form for me to nominate myself. I hope it's OK for me to ask. (It seems like the coaching page is backlogged.)

Best wishes,

Gnfgb2 18:50, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Bummer. I do have a little over 300 and I did edit as an IP for a while, but I understand that's certainly not 5000. Thanks for the reply, though.--Gnfgb2 19:04, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 5 November, 2007, a fact from the article Severus of Barcelona, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 19:49, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

more zinta

HI john. I'm absolutely appalled now that the same few who ganged up the stop Preity Zinta becoming a feature are now intentionally trying to demote it not only from an A but below a GA back to a B with a Wikipedia:Good article reassessment. This is a disgrace and i tlooks as though they are going to ruin everything. How could this happen? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 10:23, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

mammals projects

as part of your talk tagging, you included fictional characters. i assume this was just simply error on your part and have reverted White Rabbit and March Hare - Quaeler 06:51, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Trivia

Generally it's probably better to use the {{trivia}} template rather than the raw category - incidentally this is a cleanup template and category. Rich Farmbrough, 09:10 7 November 2007 (GMT).

A Wizard of Mars

I just wanted to point you over to the new book that Diane Duane is posting excerpts of on her site for subscribers. The chapters so far haven't pulled much from Burroughs, but there have been strong hints of Barsoom-ish stuff coming up later. :-)

Also, I wanted to point a couple things out not-on the Catholics and Freemasonry talk page, after what happened with MSJapan's RfA. :-) The first is that since no one body speaks for Masonry, it's entirely possible that there are regular jurisdictions out there that don't follow the 2B1ASK1 policy. Also, as you told the story, he didn't offer membership: he indicated that he thought that you would be a good addition, if you were to apply for membership. Not a huge difference, but enough to get by.--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 15:15, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. I'm happy to see that the ERB estate has permitted such.

I acknowledge that no one person will necessarily act in full compliance with rules. Having said that, I didn't state earlier that I stated immediately upon the offer to "get me in the Masons" that I said I couldn't, that the employer responded emotionally, saying "But we're losing members" in a tone of abject despair, and continued to basically harass me on becoming a member for a full week thereafter until I got one of the other officers of the firm to talk to him. I do not take the full nature of the discussion as being necessarily regular for freemasonry in general, given that individual's widely acknowledged tendencies toward emotionalism and self-aggrandizement, but didn't think to question the possibility of the "offer" itself not being at least acceptable by the rules. John Carter 15:33, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

1. I don't know if it's something that involves permission... We'll have to wait a while to find out. :-)
2. Ok, definitely out of line. Thanks for the clarification.--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 15:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

The Editor's Barnstar

		The Editor's Barnstar
		I noticed that your edits were impressive and so I've decided to award you this Editor's Barnstar! Wikidudeman (talk) 20:40, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Quaere

John, How do you count the number of articles in a category including all subcategories?
Also, is there a tool or some other way to take two categories together and create a list of all things that are in both categories?--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 22:28, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

• I wish I knew. There might be some such tool, but I've personally never used it. My guess would be the best place to ask would be either the WikiProject Council talk page or the Wikipedia:Bot requests page. Someone at the latter should definitely know if such are available. John Carter 22:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

My admin nomination

Best I can tell it is done and should presumably go public soon. I'm a bit confused on that front but I have accepted the nomination I think it is a question of just making it public that needs to be done. (Emperor 01:10, 8 November 2007 (UTC))

Discussing

Sorry... I will revert... and raise the issue on the talk page. Its just that JAS's addition was so over the top as far as mis-representing the source that I over reacted. One Masonic essayist, who admits he is not a historian, becomes "some scholars attached to UGLE", the quote he cites discusses Italian Freemasonry and does not mention GOdF... etc etc.Blueboar 23:33, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Emperor

I see it's already there! Pedro :  Chat  16:32, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, someone moved it in the interim. Sorry for any possible disruption. John Carter 16:33, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Result

Dear John Carter. I felt ashamed, what with computer problems among other things, I couldn't pull my weight in the arbitration process, and felt as though I had let both you and Ovadyah down. So that graceful badge on my page just now chuffs me somewhat. I have electrical storms overhead ad must get off line to save what remains of the computer. Could you pass on the thanks I extend to you to others, especially to Ovadyah. Yes, if I can I will certainly in the near future look at the pages you indicate. Finest regards Nishidani 18:20, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello

John, thank you for the Purple Star. It is very much appreciated. :) As for the articles you wanted me to look over, unfortunately I've lost complete interest in Jesus-related articles so I will have to decline especially since my time online is limited. Take care. --Loremaster 18:22, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:LIT

Hey, I was wondering if you could fix something. All of the quality and importance categories are coming up red. How do we create them? Wrad 03:56, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship

Have you considered applying for adminship? I'm currently looking for good wikiproject-oriented editors who might have a use for the tools, and your username stood out. --Tony Sidaway 04:12, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

See here - we'll get him to agree eventually ;) (Emperor 12:15, 10 November 2007 (UTC))

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ebionites

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The Arbitration Committee found that MichaelCPrice (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has engaged in sustained edit-warring and is subject to an editing restriction for one year, he is limited to one revert per page per week and must discuss any content changes on the article's talk page. Should any user subject to an editing restriction in this case violate that restriction, that user may be briefly blocked, up to a week in the event of repeated violations. After 5 blocks, the maximum block shall increase to one month. For the Arbitration Committee, Cbrown1023 talk 04:54, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

'Concession Speech'

In regards to the AFD nomination for my article page:

Comment. I'm not stupid. The Wiki-masses have spoken. Be it as it may, I disagree with the 'snowball' interpretation. Rather, I see a 'stacking the deck' situation where the opposition became quite vicious in their determination to 'exterminate' this article. I was not given the benefit of the doubt on anything, including:

1.First and foremost, it seems that comments made in my favor were removed or collapsed, evidence withheld, etc. If a user did argue for keeping, that was quickly and viciously opposed. There was no 'assume good faith' here.

2.Anti-canvassing by User: Brown-haired girl, About Movies, Pete Forsyth, Kitty Brewster, and ShotInfo...at least one of which admitted to it, and the others the evidence exists, denials or no. In four of the cases, the dispute centered on a previous article or issue (supercentenarian trackers, Mary Wood, David Horrobin). Not that they shouldn't be allowed to opine, but it was clear there were biased motivations at work here.

3. The article was pinned to the 'academic' page standard, even though my notability is not as an 'academic' but as an established 'media' authority (that is, an 'expert' that the media turns to to answer questions or back up a statement about an issue).

Read WP:BIO again. It says:

[edit] Specific examples of sources The person has been the subject of ONE of the following sources (which must be referenced in the article):

1.A credible independent biography. Database sources such as Notable Names Database, Internet Movie Database and Internet Adult Film Database are not considered credible since they are, like wikis, mass-edited with little oversight. Additionally, these databases have low, wide-sweeping generic standards of inclusion.

2.Widespread coverage over time in the media such as the BBC, The Times or other reliable sources. If reliable sources only cover the person in the context of a particular event, then a separate biography may be unwarranted.

3.Demonstrable wide name recognition from reliable sources.

4.In depth, independent, coverage in multiple publications showing a widely recognized contribution to the enduring historical record in the person's specific field.[4]

It doesn't say "ALL" of the following. It says "ONE" of the following. If it had said "ALL" I would have never created the article in the first place. But it said 'one' and it appears that I meet 2 out of four, widespead coverage in the media and wid name recognition from reliable sources. Therefore I assert that this article meets definition #2 and definition #3. I have not claimed to meet #1 or #4.

I have, in fact, had 'widespread coverage in the media over time' and 'demonstrable wide name recognition from RELIABLE sources.

So, that means that a single trivial mention in the BBC isn't enough. But if, over time, there is 'widespread coverage over time', that SHOULD count. Last I checked, I have been in over 1,000 news articles from all six inhabited continents. I also pass the 'Google test'.

Results 1 - 10 of about 58,900 for Robert+Young+gerontology.

Results 1 - 10 of about 242,000 for Robert+Young+oldest.

Results 1 - 10 of about 173,000 for Robert+Young+Guinness.

That's not 10. That's not 100. That's not 1,000. That's, in fact, hits in the five and six digits.

At the very least, those voting 'delete' should have voted 'weak delete'. To do otherwise is simply to ignore the evidence. Even Cambridge University uses my data:

http://pimm.wordpress.com/2007/09/14/sens3-stephen-coles-on-the-secrets-of-supercentenarians-slides/ (see slide 5)

However, I can understand, given that the arguments I made were collapsed, hardly a fair fight.

There has also been coverage:

http://www.globalaging.org/health/us/2006/longevityclues.htm

I admit that MOST of the coverage isn't ABOUT me, directly, and this seems to be the crux of the issue for some. But my biggest disagreement is the hangup on 'trivial' coverage. When you are the cited authority in an article, that is NEVER trivial. The example given of 'trivial' coverage is a rock band mentioned in Clinton's autobiography. That band reference could be deleted; therefore, it is trivial. But newspaper use of an 'expert' to make a statement, assertion, or contention is NOT. I do think quite a few of you here need to go back and re-read the definitions. And while, in hindsight,

Further, given the 'stacked-deck' approach here (most of my comments deleted or shrunk down, while false/incorrect statements were bandied about by others), it does seem this ship will sink. On its maiden voyage. Like the Titanic. Like Kenny Rogers said, "Know when to hold'em, Know when to fold'em." But like losing a single football game, there's always next week. Or next year.

Ryoung122 06:48, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Michael C Price

User Carter,

I'd just like to note that, ironically, I've had arguments with Michael C Price before. But I can respect those persons, like Canadian Paul, where arguments can lead to 'constructive' improvements. That occurs when both sides give a little and listen to what the other is actually saying. That comment wasn't directed at you but at Wikipedia in general. If it's the encyclopedia that 'anyone can edit', it stands to reason that a majority of the persons here will be less-educated or less-intelligent than an 'expert' or even just a non-notable scientist. To me, Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia but a social experiment, like Facebook. People build alliances, friendships, tribes. It's like "Survivor." Who will be voted off the island next? In both cases, had I kow-towed to the original push to delete the 'supercentenarian trackers' category, both my article and Louis Epstein's probably wouldn't have even been nominated for deletion (whether they meet the standards or not) because the only people that visited would be those that were interested. Like the 'Flight of Icarus' story, downfall comes from 'flying too high' (too close to the sun). Hiding under a rock is acceptable.

Note I originally created my article, in part, as WP:POINT. And though the article is going down now, my point has been made. Other, similar articles, like David Allen Lambert, that probably shouldn't have existed, but maybe so, are going down. It made sense: if that article could survive, why not mine?

However, it wasn't just about that, either. It is also about the fact that, any time a new idea emerges, it has to be adjusted to. Cortes was initially defeated by the Aztecs in 1519, but won two years later.Galileo backed down to the Catholic church, but now we do believe that the Earth revolves around the sun. Sooner or later, people will realize what the scientists already have: that studying supercentenarians involves more than simply 'honoring' the world's oldest person as an historical relic. No, we are finding genetic keys to longevity and the aging process.

In addition, I have been leading the charge for Wikipedia to respect the mainstream scientific and publishing consensus regarding extreme human longevity. When people insist that Mary Ramsey Wood lived to 120 in Oregon in 1908 (disclosure: and they are from Oregon, and their sources are all local), it raises questions of whether enough is being done to counter 'localism' and 'localist myth.'

Finally, even if the articles I created were found to be not 'independently notable' by a Wiki-majority, that doesn't preclude my comments that the articles were nominated originally by persons who were first involved in a dispute with me. Thus, Wikipedia is 'not a computer' and its editors are not 'robots' (well, not all of them, anyway). Personal biases, emotion, etc. all get in the way of objective fairness. I also find some coming across as extremely arrogant. The irony is that, perhaps, had I posted 'nothing' to the AFD page, perhaps the results would have been closer. But I am reminded of Mel Gibson in the movie Braveheart, where he is given one last chance to kiss the ass of the powers that be, and instead chooses 'freedom' (or torture, as is what happened). I do not regret the choices I made, though I do feel that a certain 'tribalism' exists and that it is human nature to kill those those that may be different, much as the first one killed in the Lord of the Flies was a fat nerd with glasses. Ok, I'm not fat, but I do have glasses.

I do note that each person has their own personal biases/favorites. I tend to favor 'inclusion' of biography and geography. I favor exclusion of non-notable college football players who scored one career touchdown, fake TV characters from minor shows, and lists of takeoffs and landings from Manchester airport (I thought Wikipedia was 'not' a phone book? 'Not' a directory? Therefore to have articles like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_destinations_served_by_Manchester_Airport_Terminal_3

really means that Wikipedia is out of control. That the articles 'survived deletion' says even more.Ryoung122 19:34, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

P.S. In response to 'canvassing': I think such accusations are, once again, biased. We see users such as Kittybrewster admit to it, but nothing happens, because she is supporting the status quo. Canvassing for the status quo=acceptable. Canvassing for a minority position=unacceptable. This, despite the fact that Wikipedia calls for a pluralistic approach that takes multiple viewpoints into account, unless those views represent an extreme margin. And in this case, Wikipedia may have erred. From BBC to ABC, Cambridge University to UCLA, my work has been accepted by the very highest echelons in academia and the mainstream media. Yet I'm being voted off the island by persons such as MLA, who doesn't know anything about the field and whose main contributions to Wikipedia have bee the creation of MMA articles. And this speaks to the larger ills of society itself, not just Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a tool that reflects society. We still, in the majority, value violence and sports over academic pursuits. Football, soccer, basketball players all make much more than college professors, even the best and brightest in the field. Thus the problem is not just with Wikipedia, but society itself.

Finally again, FYO I am more than two, but slightly less than three, standard deviations above the 'average' IQ, and therefore I see fit to say that I, like Michael C Price, and more than two orders of magnitude above the average member of society. Even if the average Wikipedian is slightly above societal average, we can still see the groundwork of 'one' order of magnitude higher. Of course, an established Wikipedian may be well above the average Wikipedia user, so again those comments were not about you personally but about the system, which I see as having quite many flaws. I do hope that these types of 'essays' will lead to 'constructive' improvements in the future.

Sincerely, Robert Young Ryoung122 20:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmmn: comment, I don't know enough about the 'Ebionite' controversy to really chime in about the merits of the debate itself. The point was that Michael C Price appears to be a bright individual. Sometimes that becomes a problem because exceptionally bright children are often raised when young to think too highly of themselves and not respect the positions of others enough. So, enough about that.Ryoung122 20:02, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. I think several people have gotten that impression regarding this individual. Regarding your own article, however, I think that, with the existing 2-1 of delete over keep, what might work best would be to try to create a subsection of another article regarding the subject, and turn the existing article into a redirect, at least for a while. John Carter 20:10, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Deprecation

John,

A friendly word. I know that you want to be an admin, but many of us are pretty happy to potter on editing our fields of interest and not paying too much attention to policy. So terms such as "deprecate" are jargon to us. Please don't shout at us for not showing the same ambition as you, we believe that we are playing just as important a role in the whole process by editing our areas.

I really don't mean to chide, and I'd have no problem in you deleting this message once you read it, but please remember that we rubes also make up Wikipedia.

JASpencer 23:04, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Blofeld

HI John I'd like to thank you for all your support and your high regard for me as an editor. I found it odd that an FA can be rejected despite 25 supports against 6 as it "isn't a vote" but then an article can then be delisted from a GA on grounds that it was a "8-2 vote to delist". Its not the first time I've seen double standards!! in this way and major decisions made by a tiny group of people. What is GA or FA does have some element of POV depending on who is reading it whatever the "criteria" is. What I found appalling was that somebody had referred to efforts at adding all the images and developing general articles which people have worked hard on in Indian cinema as "a pile of garbage" when they've spent many weeks trying to improve it and have clearly improved. I couldn't believe how bad other editors behaved on many of the recent events which continously made things a lot worse. It made me loose faith in how this site is run and I am still far from convinced that the system of decision making around here is secure. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 11:40, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Edits such as this are clearly disruptive and vandalising yet nothing was done about it and this which shows a clear aim by this user to remove existing content and damaging the encyclopedia. I've had enough of trying to protect articles being damaged ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 14:59, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Right I've just speedied about 10 or so images which are questionable as they are either screenshots or promotional shots the remaining are legitimate and this has been confirmeds. This site while appearing to be a lousy blog is owned by Caledonian publishing , a company worth $100 millions of dollars . They employ an agency of many photogtaphers based in Mumbai which deal primarily with the Bollywood film industry. Excluding screenshots and obvious promo photos this agreement is valid. I have suggested writing this into the agreement that screenshots or promo posters can't be used but the vast majority are valid and it is a superb source,. People were using a handful of images as an example to ruin the entire lot ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 16:01, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately he has removed your message as "nonsense". I've tried to go out of my way to justify things, I'm only doing it as I feel hundreds of articles are under future attack. He has responded but it a clear sarcastic tone. I don't know what the issue is. I'm tired of my work being disrupted. I always try to avoid conflicts but if articles and weeks of people work and effort are to be just thrown away then this is just unacceptable. This is the situation I'm talking about and nothing is being done by admin about it. Every time I log in a peacefully try to continue with my work I see that things are continuously up for deletion or under attack ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 16:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Located at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Sarvagnya. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 16:52, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry yes KNM - sounds like an airline. The same succession everytime. I wonder when Nichalp will turn up. Its gone on too long -I only care and am bothering with this because I don;t want to see people like this ruin articles which everybody reads ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 17:49, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Increasingly you can see what I have had to put up with over the last few weeks it is a nightmare and unless I am willing to see articles begin to be deleted and real helpful content removed then I can't escape them. One Indian editor supports the other. User:Gnanapiti has recieved an award by Sarvanya. The same group of editors who know each other every time. Hey I have to get off here now for a day or two . It does my head in ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 18:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

By the end of the discussion they end up dominating everything -the same group every time-the decent wikipedians like you and I are attempted to be pushed to the side or made to look foolish when we are much much better than this. It was the same group who unaminously delisted the article as a GA which we spent time in doing without any discussion and attempt to improve it first. It is not just this which is why I am concerned there are lot of things which is why I am bothering to comment on that page. Adios ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 18:29, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

My patience is really being tested today. Does The Little Ones look like a speedy to you? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 16:26, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

What concerns me is this user is applying for adminship. I really worry whats happening around here!!! Soon it will be accpetable to start speedying existing articles without going to afd or at least prodding them ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 16:50, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Which one are we talking about here? John Carter 16:53, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

The recent deleter Metalhead or whatever his name is not Sarvagnya. See User talk:Jimfbleak#Adminship. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 16:58, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Wow he has a history with more editors than I thought -apparently he has been reported many times before but by "mindless trolls" as he put it not by "somebody like Blofeld". I doubt anybody's going to do anything and the problem remains and content affected. His tone when referring to others not just me is awful -it is clearly reflected in all of his edit summaries and past conversations with editors outside his cling along group. And then he expects people to assume good faith and that he is working significantly to contructively edit wikipedia. I don't know what you think of me because of this but it isn't making me look that great . I'd rather they settled it and I could continue peacefully. Hey ever heard of Saint Baruc?? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 18:34, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if you;ve noticed but every time another editor tried to make a valid and strong claim against him one of his band of cronies steps up in line to try to make it invalid ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 18:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes at present they are renonating the local library and a lot of content isn't accessable in the temporary place. I'm sure I could dig up some local historical info about him. There is some great local history where I live and another saint Saint Canice or Cainnech of Aghaboe was ordained at Llancarfan. St Andrews Major (my photo) about 3 miles away is a beautiful little church and it is one of the most tranquil spots I've visited , even on par with Kauai! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 18:45, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Are you certain I can't email you? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 19:16, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

• Actually, right now, I'm fairly certain you could. John Carter 19:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Seems a lot more calmer today (thank goodness) although Riana and but serious ran into a heated conflict over that message sent to the blog. Hopefuly they can do something. If not tough luck if they don't want to use a resource of 20,000 images!! Any time spent on something like that and conflict I think is a waste but I couldn't really keep away from injustice. luckily I hae been able to continue as normal today. Hey you did know that on that editor list the top two editors are bots. Polbot I know has often created 6 new articles a minute!!! That makes me top !! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? —Preceding comment was added at 16:13, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Anyway I've done pretty much all I can to make admin aware of his actions and that they are a potential threat to the fair running of wikipedia in the future. I have seen many exmaples of where they have combined to almost bully people and get their own way. I've also tried to highlight that some of their policies on their own articles are often misguided and missing the most important purpose of them. As you said the report has made people more aware of him and them as a group than before and if other editors come across him in the future and report him again, sooner or later something is going to twig with admin. This could be months even years and it is clear not for me to personally waste any more time against them. If they really want the articles to improve I'd like to see them do a lot more about it. What do you think? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 21:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Have I offended you or something? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 11:19, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

The Preity Zinta article. Technically we can't claim full use I think but I persoanlly think one or screenshots to illustrate key points in an actor's career should be acceptable if detailed rationale is given. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 17:54, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

The problem lies in that you generally can't obtain free images of films unless they are older people like John Wayne where many ofhis films are public domain. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 18:01, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

list of the Day

I noticed you voted on the List of the Day proposal. A new one has been made and your comments are welcome. The Placebo Effect 01:53, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Set nominations for Version 0.7

Hi John, I've made a couple of set nominations (Post-colonial leaders and Tennis) for Version 0.7, and I'd like to have someone from the Review Team take a look at them. I've got some feedback and suggestions from the Tennis folks. I know you're busy, so only if you have time, but I'd appreciate your opinions - I don't want to promote them without approval from another person in the team. BTW, User:CBM is writing a selection bot for us, so hopefully most of the approvals will begin to be done automatically soon - not ideal, but MUCH faster than the manual system we've used so far. Cheers, Walkerma 02:53, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Skyscrapers invitation

I saw that you had previously named yourself as an interested user on the WikiProject proposal page, and thought that you might be interested in joining the finished Skyscrapers WikiProject. Cheers! Rai-me 03:51, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 12 November, 2007, a fact from the article Felinus and Gratian, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 15:20, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 13 November, 2007, a fact from the article Gerard of Lunel, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

On November 13, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article All Nations, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:39, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

J. L. Wilkinson

J. L. Wilkinson's article says that he founded the All Nations baseball club, in contrast to your article. Can you harmonize it with the facts, perhaps with an inline citation to explain the confusion the story of the absconding former founder isn't widely known. It would also help ensure the DYK hook is accurate (or at least verifiable). Rigadoun (talk) 19:17, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

my rfa

If you voted in my RFA...

...thank you for your participation. I withdrew with 83 supports, 42 opposes, and 8 neutrals. Your kind words and constructive criticism are very much appreciated. I look forward to using the knowledge I have accrued through the process to better the project. I would like to give special thanks to Tim Vickers and Wikidudeman for their co-nominations.

Thank you again and, best regards. VanTucky ^Talk

This RFA thanks was inspired by Lara❤Love's

Pocket pet?

I don't know what this is about, but you really need to take a deeper look at the article.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Thought you might find my recent additions interesting

John, I just through these stubs together, wondering if you are familiar with these and can add anything.

• The Eternal Lover (the only one of these three that I own or have read, I need to go back and re-read it)
• The Cave Girl
• Jungle Girl

--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 10:03, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

What Genre?

See User_talk:Kevinalewis#Fantasy_vs._Lost_World. I'd appreciate your thoughts, if you agree with Kevinalewis just tell me, if not then we should probably take it up on the Edgar Rice Burroughs talk page.

Also see my latest The Moon Maid again just a stub so far. I've got this one but I don't think I've ever read it.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 02:55, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't remember that much of about any of the volumes, and, worse, can't find right off any review materials on any of them, although I'm fairly sure the Lupoff bio will have some. I remember reading all the Ace editions when I was in school, but that's some time ago now. Regarding the genre, Lost World is probably more technically accurate, but it seems Kevin prefers Fantasy, which might be a better choice, if for no other reason because of the existence of the related Fantasy task force. -- John Carter (talk) 18:09, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

My sig

*grin* I never liked those mile-log custom sigs, so I found a way to be distinctive, short, and sweet. :-)--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 19:34, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Category:Old Testament saints

John, you created category:Old Testament saints in February, and were populating it. It was then redirected to a replacement category:Hebrew Bible saints which is now up for deletion - please comment there. - Fayenatic (talk) 09:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

RfA

I considered not spamming talk pages but not saying "thanks" just isn't me. The support was remarkable and appreciated. I only hope that I am able to help a little on here. Please let me know if I can help you or equally if you find any of my actions questionable. Thanks & regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:26, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello John

Here are the images: this, this and this. From the page of Preity Zinta. A new reuest for a peer review was opened, and Sarvagnya and Gananapiti say that they aren't allowed. See how it's used here. Can't just we do the same? It's a recently promoted FA. I really doubt these users' claims are 100% right. Acceptable free images are definitely not available. What do you say? Shahid • ^Talk2me 18:23, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Burma and the Internet

Hi John. I'm really excited at what has been happening the last few days. As you may know Myanmar has strict censorhsip and limited Internet access - particularly with the english speaking world. However User:Ekyaw (check his contributions) is a computer engineer I think and has got onto here and speaks fairly good english. He has a scanner and will be able to scan in images from sources within the country that we can't access for use in new articles he is creating on here when absolutely nothing!!! is currently available on google the whole web in english. Basically this is a breakthrough I've been looking for a long time to find. For instance check out Burma at the imdb - it has about 3 films. now compare it to List of Burmese films (which I will add the tables to). Burma is one of the few major countries with the exception of some African countires that doesn't have much info online because of the current regime. Articles like Phoe Par Gyi, Style (2004 film) etc. Isn't this superb news? I hope the country can increase internet access and increase english teaching to make this even more possible.

Now his english is far from perfect and some of his new articles may not be wikified properly but he is clearly learning - I think this is a great development ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 19:20, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

This looks great! I would love to see more of the Burmese content improved, and having an inside source helps even more. Actually, even being able to say things like "having an inside source" feels good, as it lends a note of high adventure to the proceedings here. :) Regarding working with English, if you ever see an article with good content, but maybe less than adequate phrasing, let me know and I'll try to pitch in as I can. I'd like to maybe try to get the League of Copyeditors to do the same thing, but I wonder what you think of maybe trying to get more "speciailized" groups together for specific regional linguistic variations. -- John Carter (talk) 19:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Rfc procedure

Thanks, I'm still writing up the darn thing. Hang on for just a bit, please and thanks for the heads up anyway!---- Ramdrake (talk) 19:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)